DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KANDHAMAL, PHULBANI
C.C NO.24 OF 2017
Present: Sri Rabindranath Mishra - President.
Miss Sudhiralaxmi Pattanaik - Member.
Sri Purna Chandra Tripathy - Member.
Rabinarayan Choudhury, aged 25 years
S/O: Basudev Choudhury,Choudhury Street ( Lalagorji)
At/PO: Aska Dist: Ganjam-76110, At present working as postal Assistant
Head Post Office, Phulbani AT/PO/PS: Phulbani Town
Dist: Kandhamal- 762001. ………………………….. Complainant.
Versus .
1.Quick Heal Technologies (p) Ltd.
603, Mayfair Tower 11, Wakdewadi
Shivajinagar, pune, India- 411005.
2.The New Inida AssuranceCo. Ltd.
D O No- 111700 03rd Floors, Asian Building.
R Kamani Road, Bllard Estate Mumbai- 40000. …………………………….. OPP. Parties.
For the Complainant: Self.
For the OPP. Parties: For the O.P No.1: Self, For the O.P No.2: None.
Date of Order: 26-09-2017
O R D E R
The case of the Complainant in brief is that he had purchased one OPPO FIS Smartphone (SL No.89DQSWBUF14D9DGQ, IMEI-1-863795036296912 & IMEI-2-863795036296904) on 04.01.2017 and the same was insured under the O.P No.2. On 1-3-2017 the said Smart phone was snached away by some evil people at Bus stand, Madhapur, Anugul.He intimated this fact to the O.Ps through E. mail on 01-03-2017 which was acknowledged on 03-03-2017. The O.P No.1 told him to intimate an ID for processing his claims but no intimation regarding the ID was given to him till 29-05-2017 in spite of several E-mail intimation. He got the intimation ID on 29-06-2017 from the O.Ps. The Complainant approached before the Madhapaur Policy Station but they denied to accept his report if
-2-
the word “snatched” will be used in his report. So, he lodged a report in the website of Odisha Police on 01-03-2017 and got an ID on 02-03-2017 through E. mail. Then he blocked his 2 SIMS (Airtel & BSNL). On 02-06-2017 he lodged a written report before the Athamallick Police station as wanted by the O.P regarding the missing of his smart phone. The Complainant submitted all required documents before the O.P No.1 but his claim was rejected by O.P No.2 on 14-06-2017 due to outside of the scope of the policy and for delayed intimation given to police. As the O.P No.1 intimated the ID No. after 4 months , they committed deficiency in service and also failed to provide proper customer care service . The cost of the mobile set was Rs. 18,999/- and he has also deposited towards the premium of the insurance of the said smart phone before the O.Ps. Hence he has filed this complaint claiming his insured amount with penal interest along with compensation of Rs. 20,000/- towards his mental harassment and Rs. 10,000/- towards cost of litigation and other expenses.
The O.P No.2 was set exparte as he failed to appear and also failed to file his version in spite of getting notice from this Forum. The case of the O.P No.1 as per his version is that for the benefit of the customers quick Heal with help of the New India Assurance Co. Ltd brings up a scheme to provide insurance cover for the mobile handset of the customer, those who has purchased antivirus. As per scheme the insurance cover is provided by New India Assurance Co. Ltd. So, Quick Heal has no role to play, as far as insurance aspect is considered. Quick Heal is liable only in case, antivirus is not working. Hence, Quick Heal is just a proposer and not the insurer and the insurer is the New India Assurance Co. Ltd. The O.P No.1 is no way liable to repay the insurance amount and the compensation and litigation cost. The O.P no.1 has not committed any deficiency in service as alleged by the Complainant.
During course of hearing we have heard the complainant. We have gone through the complaint petition, the version filed by O.P No.1, the documents filed by both the parties in support of their case very carefully. It is submitted by the Complainant that the delay caused due to late intimation regarding the supply of ID by the O.Ps. As E. Mail intimation regarding the missing of smart phone was given to the police, there is no delay in filing the report in the police station. In the version of O.P. No.1 it is clearly stated that the O.P No.2 , the New Indian Assurance Company Ltd is the Insurer and the O.P No.1 , the Quick Heal is just a proposer . So, it is crystal clear that the O.P No.2 is responsible to settle up the insurance claim of the Complainant who is bonafied customer of the O.Ps. The O.P No.2 has not filed any version in this case to counter the allegation of the Complainant, for which he was set exparte in this case. It is seen from the complaint petition that on the date of occurrence it is on 01-03-2017 the Complainant intimated this matter through E. Mail ID of the Insurance Company but necessary ID was given to him on 29-06-2017 after 4 months approximately which amounts to gross negligence on the part of the O.Ps. It is also seen in the complaint petition that immediate intimation was given to the police regarding missing or theft of the smart phone. As the O.P No.2 had received the Insurance premium from the complainant towards insurance coverage of the smart phone it is his duty and responsibility to settle up the claim of the Complainant.
-3-
In the above circumstances the letter given by O.P No.2 on 14-06-2017 has no merit and the reasons mentioned therein are not bonafied. Accordingly the O.P No.2 is liable to settle up of the claim of the Complainant. Hence the O.P No.2 is directed to pay the cost of the mobile deducting depreciation charge of 10% from the purchase price i.e. Rs. 18,999/- to the Complainant as per calculation given in section 4 of terms and conditions of the New Indian Assurance Company Ltd along with compensation of Rs. 5,000/- towards mental agony and financial loss of the Complainant. The O.P No.2 is further directed to pay Rs. 1000/- to the Complainant as the cost of litigation. The above order be complied by the O.P No.2 within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order otherwise the Complainant shall be entitled to get 10% annual interest on the entire awarded amount .
With the above direction the complaint is allowed on contest against O.P No.1 and exparte against O.P No.2. Accordingly the C.C is disposed of. Supply free copy of this order to both the parties.
MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT
